Tetragram in AV editions

[Steven Avery]

https://forums.carm.org/threads/is-...ebrew-tetragrammaton.10509/page-4#post-842282

Is the Hebrew word that would underlie “LORD” in the 1769 Oxford KJV the exact, same Hebrew word as that would underlie “Lord” in many most-1900 or present KJV editions?

There are around 90 places where "LORD" in the 1769 Oxford edition has been changed to "Lord" in most present KJV editions [besides The Companion Bible and perhaps a few others] [Gen. 18:27,

1611 errors that were quickly fixed were put back into the Oxford 1769

A quick check shows that the Hebrew is not the Tetragram.

AV-PCE
Genesis 18:27
And Abraham answered and said,
Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

In the 1611 some non-Tetragram were put as LORD,

http://sceti.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=93

you can see it was corrected by the correction editions.

Corrected by 1637

The Holy Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New: newly translated out of the originall tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised (1637)
https://archive.org/details/holybiblecontain00cambiala/page/12/mode/2up

So Blayney went back to the 1611 error.

Blayney 1769
https://books.google.com/books?id=f8hOAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20

Blue Letter Bible
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/18/27/t_conc_18027
וַיַּעַן אַבְרָהָם וַיֹּאמַר הִנֵּה־נָא הוֹאַלְתִּי לְדַבֵּר אֶל־אֲדֹנָי וְאָנֹכִי עָפָר וָאֵֽפֶר׃

 

[Steven Avery]

Below is the whole post on the 1769 Oxford and LORD improperly in the text.

Rick Norris
"There are around 90 places where "LORD" in the 1769 Oxford edition has been changed to "Lord" in most present KJV editions."

We can add 1611 and 1637 editions from the Internet if we want more of the history of how this 1769 edition went astray on the Tetragram. That might help if we want to discover what went astray.

It is possible that Rick Norris has done us an unexpected service by pointing out a significant deficiency in the 1769 Oxford!

Gen. 18:27 - PCE Lord
Gen. 18:30 - PCE Lord
Gen. 18:31 - PCE Lord
Gen. 18:32 - PCE Lord
Gen. 20:4, Exod. 15:17, Exod. 34:9, Num. 14:17, Josh. 3:11, Jud. 13:8, 1 Kings 3:10, 1 Kings 22:6, 2 Kings 7:6, 2 Kings 19:23, Neh. 1:11, Neh. 4:14, Neh. 8:10, Job 28:28, Ps. 2:4, Ps. 22:30, Ps. 35:17, Ps. 35:22, Ps. 37:13, Ps. 38:9, Ps. 38:15, Ps. 38:22, Ps. 39:7, Ps. 40:17, Ps. 44:23, Ps. 51:15, Ps. 54:4, Ps. 55:9, Ps. 57:9, Ps. 59:11, Ps. 62:12, Ps. 66:18, Ps. 68:11, Ps. 68:17, Ps. 68:19, Ps. 68:22, Ps. 68:32, Ps. 77:2, Ps. 77:7, Ps. 78:65, Ps. 79:12, Ps. 86:3, Ps. 86:4, Ps. 86:5, Ps. 86:8, Ps. 86:9, Ps. 86:12, Ps. 86:15, Ps. 89:49, Ps. 89:50, Ps. 97:5, Ps. 110:5, Ps. 114:7, Ps. 130:2, Ps. 130:3, Ps. 130:6, Ps. 135:5, Ps. 136:3, Ps. 140:7, Ps. 141:8, Ps. 147:5, Isa. 3:17, Isa. 3:18, Isa. 4:4, Isa. 9:8, Isa. 9:17, Isa. 11:11, Isa. 21:6, Isa. 21:16, Lam. 1:14, Lam. 1:15, Lam. 2:1, Lam. 2:5, Lam. 2:7, Lam. 2:20, Lam. 3:31, Lam. 3:36, Lam. 3:37, Lam. 3:58, Ezek. 18:25, Ezek. 18:29, Zech. 4:14, Zech. 6:5, Zech. 9:4, Mal. 1:14, Mal. 3:1].

The question is how the 1769 Oxford got so off-base on this question.

Rick Norris may actually give a partial explanation.

You also ignore the fact that a different edition of the Masoretic text (one printed in the 1700's) was used in making the changes to the 1769. Was that 1705 Hebrew text edition identical to the one used by the KJV translators and has it ever been completely collated and compared to the 1525 Ben Chayyim edition and why were the additional sources used in the making of the KJV ignored? One unidentified person in the1800's did the comparing, and this one person's unverified decisions are being blindly trusted and followed by later printers.

This claim from Rick Norris about a 1705 Hebrew edition being used by the 1769 may or may not be true. Plus his 1800s claim is strange, is he saying they did the 1769 comparing? Rick should give his sources. (First, John M. Asquith may have some of the detail.)

However, the PCE does not have the Oxford 1769 errors.

And as John M. Asquith points out, that edition is no longer printed.

Concerning the 1769 Blayney Bible - John M. Asquith - 2020
https://www.purecambridgetext.com/post/concerning-the-1769-blayney-bible

The American Bible Society diverged slightly from the Blayney text in the late 1840s. Oxford went with a different text in 1893 or 1894. Cambridge had abandoned the Blayney Text in 1873 by printing the Scrivener Paragraph Bible but quickly restored the Blayney plates when the change was so universally rejected. They officially got rid of the Blayney text during WWI when they melted their plates and let England make bullets out of them. They have never printed it since then.

===============================

This was the full original Rick Norris post.

Is the Hebrew word that would underlie “LORD” in the 1769 Oxford KJV the exact, same Hebrew word as that would underlie “Lord” in many most-1900 or present KJV editions?

There are around 90 places where "LORD" in the 1769 Oxford edition has been changed to "Lord" in most present KJV editions [besides The Companion Bible and perhaps a few others] [Gen. 18:27, Gen. 18:30, Gen. 18:31, Gen. 18:32, Gen. 20:4, Exod. 15:17, Exod. 34:9, Num. 14:17, Josh. 3:11, Jud. 13:8, 1 Kings 3:10, 1 Kings 22:6, 2 Kings 7:6, 2 Kings 19:23, Neh. 1:11, Neh. 4:14, Neh. 8:10, Job 28:28, Ps. 2:4, Ps. 22:30, Ps. 35:17, Ps. 35:22, Ps. 37:13, Ps. 38:9, Ps. 38:15, Ps. 38:22, Ps. 39:7, Ps. 40:17, Ps. 44:23, Ps. 51:15, Ps. 54:4, Ps. 55:9, Ps. 57:9, Ps. 59:11, Ps. 62:12, Ps. 66:18, Ps. 68:11, Ps. 68:17, Ps. 68:19, Ps. 68:22, Ps. 68:32, Ps. 77:2, Ps. 77:7, Ps. 78:65, Ps. 79:12, Ps. 86:3, Ps. 86:4, Ps. 86:5, Ps. 86:8, Ps. 86:9, Ps. 86:12, Ps. 86:15, Ps. 89:49, Ps. 89:50, Ps. 97:5, Ps. 110:5, Ps. 114:7, Ps. 130:2, Ps. 130:3, Ps. 130:6, Ps. 135:5, Ps. 136:3, Ps. 140:7, Ps. 141:8, Ps. 147:5, Isa. 3:17, Isa. 3:18, Isa. 4:4, Isa. 9:8, Isa. 9:17, Isa. 11:11, Isa. 21:6, Isa. 21:16, Lam. 1:14, Lam. 1:15, Lam. 2:1, Lam. 2:5, Lam. 2:7, Lam. 2:20, Lam. 3:31, Lam. 3:36, Lam. 3:37, Lam. 3:58, Ezek. 18:25, Ezek. 18:29, Zech. 4:14, Zech. 6:5, Zech. 9:4, Mal. 1:14, Mal. 3:1].

At four verses, the 1769 Oxford has “Lord” where present KJV editions have “LORD” [Gen. 30:30, Deut. 29:23, Jud. 2:23, Jer. 7:4]. The 1769 Oxford has “LORD God” where most present KJV editions have “Lord GOD” at some verses [Exod. 23:17, Exod. 34:23, 2 Sam. 7:18, 2 Sam. 7:19, 2 Sam. 7:20, 2 Sam. 7:28, Isa. 56:8]. At Daniel 9:3, the 1769 Oxford has “Lord GOD” instead of “Lord God” that is in most present KJV editions. The 1769 Oxford has “Lord God” at seven verses where present KJV editions have “Lord GOD” [Jud. 6:22, Isa. 3:15, Isa. 61:1, Ezek. 16:23, Ezek. 23:35, Ezek. 32:11, Ezek. 45:9]. The 1769 Oxford has “LORD GOD” at one verse [Amos 6:8].

The 1769 Oxford still has “God” at 2 Samuel 12:22 instead of “GOD.” The 1611 edition of the KJV may have had "God" from following the Latin Vulgate or from following a pre-1611 English Bible such as the Bishops' Bible that had followed the Latin Vulgate in its rendering at 2 Samuel 12:22.

Later editors changed the underlying text with their change to "GOD" to indicate Jehovah.

 

[Steven Avery]

https://m.facebook.com/groups/467217787457422/permalink/1525237928322064/?

Hi Matthew and friends,

"Since 1769, Blayney’s work has undergone some very minor revisions, the culmination of which is the Pure Cambridge Edition."

In the question of "the LORD" Blayney's edition often used those caps for Adonai phrases, which were made more sensible in the PCE.

This is more than "very minor", one list says about 90 spots.

Here you can see 4 spots in one section:

Holy Bible
https://books.google.com/books?id=f8hOAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA2-PP1

Genesis 18:27 30 31 32

==============================

Which means we should question whether this is the TR Blayney Oxford 1769:

King James Bible (Oxford) 1769 Textus Receptus Bibles

King James Bible (Oxford) 1769

textusreceptusbibles.com

1769 Oxford
https://books.google.com/books?id=f8hOAAAAYAAJ


==========

https://books.google.com/books?id=f8hOAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA2-PP1

Genesis 18:27-32 (KJV) And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it. And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake. And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there. And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake. And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.






https://textusreceptusbibles.com/KJV1769

 

[Steven Avery]

Facebook - TRA
https://www.facebook.com/groups/467217787457422/permalink/1524274018418455/?

check PCE
psalm 30:8 etc.

Alex Suarez
Author
Ezekiel 21:9 -
“Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus saith the LORD (אֲדֹנָי / 'ăḏōnāy); Say, A sword, a sword is sharpened, and also furbished:”

Malachi 1:12 -
“But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the LORD (אֲדֹנָי / 'ăḏōnāy) is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.”

Isa 38:14 -
“Like a crane or a swallow, so did I chatter: I did mourn as a dove: mine eyes fail with looking upward: O LORD (אֲדֹנָי / 'ăḏōnāy) , I am oppressed; undertake for me."

1 Kings 3:15 -
"And Solomon awoke; and, behold, it was a dream. And he came to Jerusalem, and stood before the ark of the covenant of the LORD (אֲדֹנָי / 'ăḏōnāy), and offered up burnt offerings, and offered peace offerings, and made a feast to all his servants."

Ps 90:17 -
"And let the beauty of the LORD (אֲדֹנָי / 'ăḏōnāy) our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it."

PCE
Psalm 30:8 (KJV) I cried to thee, O LORD; and unto the LORD I made supplication.

Ezekiel 21:9 (KJV) Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus saith the LORD; Say, A sword, a sword is sharpened, and also furbished:

Psalm 90:17 (KJV)
And let the beauty of the LORD our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.

Robert Lee Vaughn
Top contributor
Alex Suarez, Do you mean the rationale in Psalm 30:8? Well, I would think that finding the rationale would start with looking at other places where Adonai is represented by LORD, and see if a pattern immerges. (Unless it can be found that the translators stated such somewhere.) Additionally, some clue might be in rule # 1, which was about generally following the Bishops Bible. 1602 Bishops had LORD in the same style in both places in this verse.

Bodleian Library Arch. A b.18

View high resolution digitized images of Bodleian Library Arch. A b.18 The Holy Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New. : Authorised and appointed to be read in churches.

digital.bodleian.ox.ac.uk

I suppose my other thought is, how much does it matter (that is, to go to the extent of figuring out the rationale)? It is the same one God who is referred to in both places.

 

[Steven Avery]

Robert Lee Vaughn
Top contributor
John Uit de Flesch. I do not think I misunderstood that he is talking about all CAPS. I asked him about LORD (caps) only ever being Jehovah. And, he did reply with what Scrivener said about it.
You changed my reference to having an awareness about how CAPS and italics are usually used, to my somehow saying there is a hard and fast “rule” about italics. The only comment about the differentiated type of which I am aware is that of translator Samuel Ward: “Sixthly, that words which it was anywhere necessary to insert into the text to complete the meaning were to be distinguished by another type, small roman.” This is in an explanation to the Synod of Dort, but does not mean he intended to clarify every use of differentiated type. I am aware of 2 exceptions in the use of small roman (which is what I was looking at, in a blackletter printing, assuming though that italic would be much the same).

 

[Steven Avery]

Jhun Rhydz
LORD =YHWH /YHVH is our LORD Jesus Christ
YH=was
HW/HV=is
WH/VH=will be
Revelation 4:8-"....Holy ,holy,holy,Lord God Almighty,which was,and is,and is to come."
Revelation 1:8-"I am Alpha and Omega,the beginning and the ending,saith the Lord,which is,and which was,and which is to come, the Almighty."
YHWH is already revealed in this book